“Sports Mythbusters” is a column by Sammie Yen about common stereotypes in and around sports culture.
Everyone loves a good underdog story. We love to support a team facing seemingly insurmountable odds, which makes it even more satisfying when they succeed.
March Madness is perhaps the best example of the underdog’s prevalence. It is one of the biggest American sporting events, generating billions of dollars in revenue. And since we’re in the very heart of the 2024 NCAA Tournament, it’s worth looking back at some of the all-time biggest upsets.
In 2018, we saw the first instance of a No. 16 seed toppling a No. 1 seed. When the University of Maryland Baltimore County blew out the favored Virginia by 20 points, they made March Madness history. Earlier in their season, the UMBC Retrievers suffered a crushing 83-39 loss to Albany, and yet, they did the impossible less than two months later.
Similarly, in last year’s tournament, No. 1 seed and 23.5-point favorite Purdue Boilermakers were cut down by the No. 16 Fairleigh Dickinson Knights, who had never advanced past the first round in school history. The Boilermakers’ loss was the biggest upset (in terms of point spread) in NCAA Tournament history and will endure as one of the most memorable March matchups of all time.
The 2023 madness did not end there. Bouts of upsetting wins led to a novelty: Three of the Final Four teams had never been to the semifinals before. None of them were a top-three seed.
The aptly titled March Madness has seen its fair share of “Cinderella” victories. But historically, the statistics don’t lead to tournament-long success for these underdog teams.
What do the numbers say?
Since expanding to a 64-team tournament in 1985, No. 1 seeds have won 63.2% of the national championships. At least one No. 1 seed has appeared in the championship game of 37 of the last 38 tournaments.
On the other hand, no team below an eight-seed has won a national title. Moreover, no team seeded below 11 has touched a Final Four game. So, from a sports betting perspective, betting on underdogs to go beyond the first couple rounds would do more harm than good.
There’s a reason why a No. 1 seed is a No. 1 seed. A team who earns a high ranking coming into the postseason has performed well in the regular season and most likely just notched a conference championship. This steady success is owed not only to skill, but also to the resources and financial investment of the basketball program. Not every school is pouring millions of dollars into recruiting, facilities and staffing, so it makes sense that schools that put in more get more out.
This Vox video breaks down why underdogs in basketball might not necessarily perform as well as underdogs in other sports, albeit the video demonstrates the difference mainly within professional leagues.
While you can expect March Madness to contain some Cinderellas, generally, the clock has to eventually strike midnight and end the fairytale.
Yet a 1991 study found that in a hypothetical best-of-seven-games playoff scenario of an unidentified sport, 81% of college students would root for the underdog Team B over a “highly-favored” Team A. When those students were told to imagine Team B winning the first three games of the series, 50% of the Team B supporters shifted their loyalties to Team A.
So, why do we still love the loser?
There’s a couple theories why people will always root for the underdog.
The first has to do with “schadenfreude,” a German expression that means taking pleasure in other people’s pain. Sometimes, you might root for the underdog simply because you want to see a highly ranked team dethroned and humbled.
In terms of March Madness, it seems circumstantial. While teams normally perform to their seeding, it isn’t a best-of-seven series like the NBA playoffs. The single-elimination structure of the tournament creates unique pressure for both teams. In early rounds, when several top-seeded teams have looked beyond to “more challenging” games, this underestimation of an opponent has caused numerous upsets.
Another theory is that unanticipated wins are more rewarding than anticipated ones. There’s less on the line if your underdog team loses (since that was the expected outcome), and there’s more joy gained with a memorable upset win.
Oddly, spectators may unconsciously associate underdogs with winning. From all the Hollywood and media content of rags-to-riches stories (hence, the “Cinderella” nickname), perhaps there is a subtle expectation of the “best” story; it is more entertaining and heartwarming to see someone who struggles and perseveres versus someone who has never struggled or faced failure.
I speculate the reason why we should love a good underdog is simple: hope.
Hope in an underdog transcends sports. The underdog is all about capitalizing on the highs and maintaining composure during the lows, proving others wrong and demonstrating the difficult — and even the impossible — can be accomplished.
“Sports Mythbusters” runs every other Friday.